Disposed

Santaram Dajiba Dongre v. Divisional Commissioner Revenue, Aurangabad and Others

Bombay HC10 Aug 2016WP/6059/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging land acquisition. It held that the grievance regarding land area was substantially redressed by the issuance of a notification under Section 11 of the 2013 Act and a mechanism for joint measurement under Section 20.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of with no costs awarded.

Santaram Dajiba Dongre Vs Divisional Commissioner Revenue… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

W.P.No.6059/15

¶3

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.6059 OF 2015

¶7

Santaram S/o Dajiba Dongre Vs. The Divisional Commissioner (Revenue) Aurangabad Division,Aurangabad and another.

¶8

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶9

Court's or Judge's orders

¶10

Mr.G.B.Kulkarni, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.B.V.Virdhe, A.G.P. for the State. Mr.V.V.Pawar, advocate holding for Mr.S.S.Tope, advocate for Respondent No.4.

¶11

CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA AND K.K.SONAWANE,JJ. Date : 10.08.2016.

¶12

PER COURT :

¶13

Heard.

¶14

Mr.Kulkarni, learned counsel submits that though the land

¶15

of the petitioner is affected in the acquisition, however, no award has been passed in respect of the affected land of the petitioner. The land of the petitioner to the extent of 3 acres from Gat No.140 is affected. In the additional proposal submitted, it is stated that only 20 Ares land of the petitioner from Gat No.140 is affected which is erroneous.

¶16

Mr.Virdhe, learned A.G.P. states that the acquisition

¶17

¶18

W.P.No.6059/15

¶19

proposal for the acquisition of additional land has been prepared and the notification U/s 11 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, has been issued on 18.2.2016 and the process would be completed and if there is any discrepancy in the land of the petitioner to be acquired, it will be resolved by fresh joint measurement by the office of the Deputy Director of Land Records U/s 20 of the Act of 2013.

¶20

In view of the fact that additional proposal for acquisition of the land of the petitioner has already been submitted and notification U/s 11 of the Act of 2013 is also issued, the grievance of the petitioner to a large extent stands redressed. There is a dispute with regard to the area of the petitioner's land to be affected. The affidavit filed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Partur, categorically states that if there is any discrepancy in the land which is going to be acquired, the same will be resolved by joint measurement U/s 20 of the Act of 2013. The petitioner certainly would be present at the time of joint measurement and the same can be resolved at that time.

¶21

The Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶22

Dt.10.08.2016. asp/office/wp6059.15

¶23

¶24

W.P.No.6059/15

Santaram Dajiba Dongre v. Divisional Commissioner Revenue, Aurangabad and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santaram Dajiba Dongre v. Divisional Commissioner Revenue, Aurangabad and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Integrated Automation and Robotics, Aurangabad Vs Union of India and Others

Rev.Damodhar Tukaram Khandare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shashikala Hausrao Khedkar and Another Vs Namdeo Nannaware

Salim Daulat Patel Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Yogkshem Co. Operative Housing Society Ltd, Parbhani Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vasudeo Bhikaji Funde Vs State of Maharashtra and Others